From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Louis Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Concern about new binding. Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 12:07:13 +0300 Message-ID: References: <87a6sjpyqs.fsf@gnus.org> <838s83ra3q.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtwjocn7.fsf@gnus.org> <87wnvnmqhx.fsf@gnus.org> <87o8gz40ex.fsf@red-bean.com> <87czxfm0t8.fsf@gnus.jao.io> <877dnmt79i.fsf@red-bean.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9205"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/2.0 (3d08634) (2020-11-07) Cc: "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Karl Fogel Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 12 10:08:57 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lAURd-0002Hl-Fb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 10:08:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34464 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lAURc-0001Dj-IZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 04:08:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48708) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lAUQR-0000i8-Fr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 04:07:43 -0500 Original-Received: from stw1.rcdrun.com ([217.170.207.13]:34659) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lAUQP-0006bJ-2N; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 04:07:43 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.202.241.3]) (AUTH: PLAIN securesender, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by stw1.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 000000000001E089.0000000060264559.00003DCF; Fri, 12 Feb 2021 02:07:37 -0700 Mail-Followup-To: Karl Fogel , "Jose A. Ortega Ruiz" , emacs-devel@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877dnmt79i.fsf@red-bean.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.170.207.13; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=stw1.rcdrun.com X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:264471 Archived-At: * Karl Fogel [2021-02-06 02:39]: > On 05 Feb 2021, Jose A. Ortega Ruiz wrote: > > I honestly don't understand this reasoning. Please bear with me. Say > > today you have C-x g bound to a favourite command of yours. How would > > emacs 28 binding it by default to revert-buffer interfere with your > > emacs usage? Would that limit you in any way? Chances are you won't > > even notice (if you're setting it unconditionally in your init.el). By > > contrast, by our prohibiting binding any subset of keys to anything at > > all, users who don't (or can't) customize their emacses will never have > > any use for those "free" bindings, and will never have a more convenient > > way of accessing, say, revert-buffer. How are we making user's lives > > more convenient by prohibiting to emacs maintainers (or library writers, > > for that matter) to use any currently unbound slot for a new binding? > > Ah, I can answer this. It has to do with protecting investment. > > When I custom-bind a command to a key, I am making an investment in finger > memory. For example, I have `revert-buffer' on `C-c r' (because I use > `revert-buffer' a lot), and I chose `C-c r' precisely because it was in the > reserved space for user-chosen keybindings. That way I could be sure Emacs > would never bind some other useful new function there. I was thinking same as you some time before until somebody on Help GNU Emacs mailing list has shown me how person uses the prefix key. Then I have switched my mental model of remembering the whole key on just remembering the key coming after the prefix. Instead of {s-p p} I would remember just that prefix is s-p and key is p separated from each other. Now that what people call "muscle memory" has separate slots, one for prefix and one for keys there after. If I change prefix to {C-i i} or {C-p} now I can do whatever comes there after like {C-i i p} or {C-p p} instead of {s-p p} without problems. I have now about 15 keys after the s-p prefix, but changing prefix would not disturb me due to the expansion of the slots in my muscle memory. ;-) > Every such decision (to move a default Emacs keybinding to somewhere else) > will cause me to diverge a bit further from default Emacs, and that > divergence has overhead costs. Exactly. The cost on global users is much. I can imagine plethora of bugs files in Debian GNU/Linux and other GNU/Linux distributions, questions on Reddit and other sites where people try to find their old default key binding. Changing very default key bindings causes more than just a butterfly effect. But there are those others default key bindings that are not very defaults. Like M-z that I could not found in use in Emacs-like editors, it was not considered important to implement it in Zile, e3, mg. Jean